Industry News

When you hear the name “Ocean Way,” you probably picture the iconic studios that bear, or once bore, the name, where countless hit records have been recorded. Allen Sides, the legendary engineer behind those studios, also makes high-end studio monitors through his Ocean Way Audio brand.

In commercial studios, you’re more likely to find the company’s three-way monitors with horns, often soffit-mounted in a control room. With large footprints and price tags north of $10,000, they’re not practical for all but the most elaborate personal studios.

But recently, Ocean Way Audio released the Pro3, which is the latest in its smaller (and less-expensive) OWA monitor line. The company refers to the Pro3 as its “most affordable” monitor pair yet. At $3,000 for a pair, some might quibble with the term “affordable,” but it is within the range of many studios and recording musicians; to many, its high-end, pro-level sound quality makes it an exceptional value.

Not baffling at all

The Pro3 monitors are the smallest that Ocean Way makes. The cabinets are designed to reduce baffle reflections and low-frequency resonance. Each monitor features a circular port at the top of the back panel.

With dimensions of 9 × 14 × 13.5 (W × H × D) inches and weighing 23 pounds each, the Pro3 is small enough to fit in any-size room. They’re two-way active monitors with plenty of power — 125 watts per side for the aluminum low-frequency driver and 90 watts for the silk fabric dome–type tweeter.

Compared to most studio monitors these days, you could call their control set “minimalist.” What there is resides on the back panel. The front of the Pro3 has only the woofer and tweeter. The power indicator light is on the rear, not the front. I’m not sure I understand that design choice; to me, it makes more sense if you can see it from the listening position.

Back panel

The Pro3s offer two input options: Analog and Digital AES/EBU, both on XLR connectors. An AES/EBU digital XLR output is also included. The monitors can be switched between four different presets: Preset 1 is the default, with the analog inputs active. Preset 2 is also analog, for use with a subwoofer. When it’s on, a fourth-order high-pass filter rolls off at 85 Hz so as not to get in the way of the low frequencies coming from the sub. The other two presets are for digital input. Preset 3 sets the monitor to digital left input and Preset 4 to digital right.

The process for changing presets is not what I’d describe as user-friendly. Each monitor features a small recessed button on the back panel called the LED Selector. Near it is a series of four LEDs: two white and two red. The manual recommends using a “small blunt tool” or breaking off the end of a cotton swab to make adjustments. Pressing and holding the LED Selector for a second or more switches the white LED from 1 to 2, which toggles the active status of the analog and digital inputs.

Quicker presses set the two red LEDs, which blink when you first adjust them. The combination of white and red LEDs that are lit determines which preset is active. Fortunately, you probably won’t have to adjust them very often, if at all. I never thought I’d find myself wishing for dip switches, but I did in this case.

Each speaker also features a Master Volume control for trimming the output. It’s recessed and requires a small screwdriver or a tweaker to adjust it. It’s not detented, but has 10 position indicators printed around the recessed area, making it pretty easy to set the left and right evenly if you need to lower the volume.

That’s it for the controls, save for the power switch and voltage selector. Ocean Way Audio includes IEC power cables for each monitor.

Somewhat surprisingly, there’s no room correction filtering or EQ that you can deploy on the Pro3s other than the high-pass filter for subwoofers that’s available with Preset 2.

Taking them for a spin

I set up the Pro3s in a nearfield configuration, placed on speaker stands on top of Primacoustic Recoil Stabilizers, which are thick and heavy monitor pads. The Pro3s don’t have rubber feet, so you’ll want to use pads or decoupling stands. I connected the Pro3s to the outputs of my Cranborne Audio 500R8 interface, opened Ableton Live and hit Play on a song I’d been working on.

My first thought was, “These monitors are really bright.” But I soon realized that what I was reacting to was clarity. Everything in the mix sounded clearer and more present— the drum loops, the bass, the guitars and the keyboards. The transient reproduction was beyond impressive.

When I switched back and forth between the Pro3s and my regular monitors (I’m not naming names because it’s an unfair fight), which I like a lot, the contrast was enormous. Not only are the Pro3s excellent for mixing, their sonic clarity makes them extremely helpful in adjusting mic placement when setting up for a tracking session.

The bass response on the Pro3s is extremely tight and defined. The specs show that it goes down to 45 Hz. Mixing on the Pro3s, I found it easier to accurately gauge the level of the kick drum and bass than with my regular monitors. The imaging on the Pro3s is also impressive. According to the company, the frequency response between the two speakers is within ±0.5dB.

Crank ’em up

I was curious how the Pro3s sounded at higher levels than the 70–80 dB range I’d been listening in. I cranked the music up to over 90 dB — which, with the speakers less than three feet from my ears, was quite loud. I expected to hear the clarity diminish, but it didn’t. The monitors sounded louder but otherwise no different than at lower volumes.

If by chance you push the level up too high, the monitors are equipped with overload protection circuits that would prevent damage to the drivers and other components.

I mixed a couple of full songs on the Pro3s and got excellent results. I noticed less ear fatigue than I was used to on either pair of monitors that I use regularly in my studio. The ability to listen longer before you have to stop for a long break, or until the next day, could be a real boon for mixing productivity.

The last thing I tried was hooking up a subwoofer. I own a KRK 10s sub and connected its left and right outputs to the inputs of the Pro3s. After switching the monitors to Preset 2, to activate the high-pass filtering, I let it rip. With that extra bass, the overall sound of the system was magnificent.

Ocean Way Audio makes a couple of subs, the S10A and the S12A, which would probably sound better matched with the Pro3s than what I tried out here. But even with a sub from another manufacturer, the results were stunning.

Quality and consistency

Doing this review has been an eye-opening, or rather, an ear-opening experience for me. The Pro3s are hands-down the best-sounding monitors I’ve used in my studio. I’ve reviewed quite a few, but these stand above.

As noted, I have a few small issues. One is the lack of room correction features. Incredible as the Pro3s sound, if you have acoustical issues in your studio that you need to compensate for, they’ll be there no matter which monitors you use. I also wish they would add a front-panel power LED and that the switching system for the Presets was easier to use.

But when weighed against the stunning sound quality and performance of these monitors, those issues pale to insignificance. The headline here is that from a sonic standpoint, the Pro3s are a revelation and definitely worth every penny. If you’ve never considered spending three grand on a monitor system, you might want to change your mind.

This article originally appeared in our sister publication Mix. Radio World invites both users and suppliers to tell us about recently installed new or notable equipment. Email radioworld@futurenet.com.

The post Ocean Way Pro3s Offer ‘Ear Opening’ Experience appeared first on Radio World.

Jessica Rosenworcel, now FCC chair, is shown at a Senate committee hearing in 2018. Photographer: Andrew Harrer/Bloomberg via Getty Images

FCC Chair Jessica Rosenworcel made it clear to Republican lawmakers before her successful confirmation vote (68–31) earlier this month to a new, five-year term that she did not support efforts by “some liberal organizations” to remove conservative cable channels from their lineups or for the agency to use its license revocation power on broadcasters.

That assertion came in written answers to questions submitted after her confirmation hearing last month.

Rosenworcel was asked by at least three different Republicans about the issue of viewpoint diversity and alleged censorship of cable and broadcast.

This was how the question was posted by Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R–Tenn.): “There have been efforts by some of our colleagues in the House of Representatives to pressure MVPDs into removing Fox News, Newsmax and other conservative channels from their lineups. There have also been calls by some liberal organizations to have the FCC revoke the licenses of broadcasters like Sinclair. Are you in favor of these calls to use the FCC to remove certain viewpoints from the airwaves?”

In an answer that would have made the late Rep. John Dingell proud, her answer was a succinct: “No.”

Sen. Ron Johnson (R–Wis.) asked the question this way: “Will you commit to ensuring the FCC does not factor political content or viewpoints when issuing licenses, making regulatory decisions, or approving mergers and acquisitions?”

This time, the answer was a simple “yes.”

Sen Rick Scott (R–Fla.) got right to the “C” word (censorship): “The FCC has authority over broadcast licenses. As a nominee for this bipartisan commission, do you believe the government has the authority to censor opinions?”

“No,” said Rosenworcel, adding: “FCC authority is limited by the First Amendment and Section 326 of the Communications Act.” That section says the FCC has no authority to censor speech.

The post Rosenworcel Opposes Calls to Use FCC to Remove Fox News, Newsmax, Others appeared first on Radio World.

That’s a question noted Washington, D.C. communications attorney David Oxenford asks.

Oxenford shared details of a new joint letter posted on the Radio Music License Committee website in a blog post penned Friday by the Wilkinson Barker Knauer partner. In the letter, it is stated that GMR and the RMLC are discussing a settlement of their long-running litigation over the royalties that the commercial radio industry will pay for the public performance of music written by GMR composers.

GMR earlier this year extended their interim license offered to commercial radio stations once again. However, it came with “a substantial increase” in the amount that stations needed to pay to remain licensed during the litigation, Oxenford points out.

The new joint letter states that the interim license will be extended for another three months while the parties work on this possible settlement.  “Stations will not receive any direct notice about the need to extend their licenses from GMR,” Oxenford says.  Instead, stations are to go to the GMR website at https://globalmusicrights.com/interimextension to complete a form to remain licensed after the end of December.

The interim licenses have been signed because, over the last few years, GMR has been engaged in litigation with RMLC over whether GMR should be subject to any sort of antitrust regulation of the rates that it sets, Oxenford writes. “GMR has filed a countersuit over whether the RMLC itself violates the antitrust rules as a buyer’s cartel, by allegedly organizing all the buyers of GMR’s music to hold out for a specific price,” he explains.

A possible settlement would end any litigation. Is that on the horizon? “The joint letter looks like good news, as it indicates that some final resolution of GMR royalties may soon be at hand,” Oxenford concludes.

A marketing analytics and measurement company in the social media space has just been acquired by Comscore.

It’s a deal that closed on Thursday, and allows Comscore to expand both its Media Metrix and Video Metrix currencies.

How? Comscore bought Shareablee, allowing Media Metrix and Video Metrix to include Shareablee’s social media engagement and video insights.

This, Comscore says, “will bridge the industry gap of traditional digital and social measurement services that exists today.”

Integration plans call for Comscore digital products to benefit from Shareablee data, “allowing clients to broaden their digital footprint in products like Video Metrix with advanced social video insights, and for Shareablee clients to have additional advantages with curated views of Comscore digital data embedded in their Shareablee dashboards.”

Comscore plans to retain the Shareablee team after closing, with key members of Shareablee management, including Tania Yuki, Greg Dale and Jonathan Lieberman, continuing in leadership roles.

Shareablee provides analytics and intelligence to such clients as GroupM, ESPN, NBCUniversal and Vox Media.

— RBR+TVBR wire services

For 60 years until 2014, CBS Television Network coverage of the Fargo and Grand Forks, N. Dakota, area involved a broadcast facility that used the KXJB call letters. At that time, Gray Television shifted CBS programming to a digital LPTV facility and sold the former home of “KX4.”

The buyer? Ravi Kapur, the entrepreneur who has been snapping up low-power TV stations across the U.S. Kapur rechristened the station as KRDK-TV, and ownership of the COZI TV affiliate has had its challenges — namely, carriage on two MVPDs serving Fargo.

A fresh FCC decision will likely resolve that issue.

Please Login to view this premium content. (Not a member? Join Today!)

For the last several years, a Texas licensee has been seeking to operate a Class A radio station at 92.7 on the FM dial. However, that hasn’t happened because another licensee, led by Roy Henderson, has been authorized to do so but never followed through with a shift to that frequency for a Class A FM at 106.1 MHz.

As such, the party that wants the 92.7 FM frequency wants the FCC to remove that channel assignment from Henderson’s company, and is even willing to construct a whole new Class A FM at 100.5 MHz to make it happen.

What does the Media Bureau’s Assistant Audio Division Chief, Nazifa Sawez, have to say about the request?

Please Login to view this premium content. (Not a member? Join Today!)

The first batch of comments in the FCC’s “resilient networks” proceeding — possibly mandating broadcaster compliance to submit status reports after hurricanes and other natural disasters — are now in, and broadcasters are expressing concerns over the logistical challenges such a requirement could present.

Broadcaster participation in the web-based Disaster Information Reporting System (DIRS), which is activated in limited emergency situations, has been voluntary since it was established in 2007. The online service outage reporting system has come under scrutiny because of the frequency of major storms and other disaster events.

NAB wrote in comments any move to require broadcaster participating in DIRS would be “unduly burdensome” and could actually undermine the FCC’s overriding goal of improving public safety by disrupting stations’ efforts to provide critical information following a disaster.

“Mandating DIRS filings would force stations to redirect their already-strained staff away from trying to maintain or restore service to fill out a government form,” NAB wrote in its comments submitted this week. “Many smaller stations simply lack the bandwidth to log in, assess their operational status, and complete DIRS reports in the midst of an emergency.”

[Previously: “FCC Disaster NPRM Discusses Backup Requirements”]

NAB adds: “Alternatively, if the FCC still believes that DIRS should be mandatory, perhaps the onus should be on government to create and fund an automated system that identifies which broadcast stations are operating during a disaster.”

The proposed rulemaking, which was released in October, also looks at ways to mitigate the effects of power outages to improve communications reliability following disasters, including the possibility of imposing mutual aid obligations on broadcasters to support others when facilities are damaged or destroyed and generators become inoperable.

The FCC notes in the NPRM the Wireless Network Resiliency Cooperative Framework is a voluntary agreement developed by the wireless industry in 2016 to provide mutual aid. The new proposal, which focuses largely on cell site outages, proposes expanding the “framework” to include radio and television stations. Several commenters note the need to include broadcasters is unnecessary.

“Required mutual aid is unnecessary and potentially harmful to the already supportive relationships that naturally exist without FCC enforcement,” according to joint comments filed by the Colorado Broadcasters Association and Association of Radio Broadcasters of Puerto Rico. “In addition, requiring mutual aid between broadcasters and other industries covered by the Framework would serve little purpose. Broadcasters do not have sufficient personnel or the expertise to assist wireless and wireline telecommunications providers or cable providers recover from a disaster, and those industries do not have the expertise needed to help get damaged broadcast facilities back on the air.”

A coalition of state broadcast associations also summarily dismissed the need to require broadcasters to join the aforementioned framework: “There would be no benefit to such a move, and it would instead merely burden precious staff resources that are a fraction of what common carriers can bring to bear in such circumstances.”

The FCC proposal does raise the possibility of adopting backup power requirements for DIRS and NORS (Network Outage Reporting System) participants. The small carve out was included in the appendix section of the proposed rulemaking: “To the extent that the Commission were to adopt backup power requirements, providers subject to them, potentially including cable providers, Direct Broadcast Satellite providers, Satellite Digital Audio Radio Service, TV and radio broadcasters, Commercial Mobile Radio Service and other wireless service providers, could potentially be required to take steps to make their networks more resilient to power outages.”

That assertion led at least one observer to believe the commission could potentially require all broadcasters purchase backup power systems.

Gary Timm, chair of the Wisconsin State Emergency Communications Committee, filed comments as an individual on the matter: “If the Commission is suggesting requiring all broadcasters to acquire backup power generators on their own, this proposal should not even be considered due to the costs, particularly on small stations.”

Timm also notes there is no mention of federal funding for station generators in this current proposed rulemaking, “but that would be the most workable solution if the Commission is truly interested in broadcast station resiliency during power outages.”

NAB, which also discounts the need for additional rules regarding fuel backup for generators during times of crisis, concludes its comments touting the overall preparedness of radio and television broadcasters: “Given the Notice’s focus on the continuity of telecommunications services, it is important to highlight that broadcasting is likely the most reliable communications services during emergencies. Broadcasters, especially those in areas prone to severe weather conditions, plan and prepare throughout the year for disasters. They create, review, and practice their disaster response plans under various scenarios, enabling them to efficiently trigger such plans when disaster strikes.”

Reply comments to FCC docket 21-346 are due Jan. 14.

Comment on this or any article. Email radioworld@futurenet.com.

The post FCC Reviews Comments on Network Resiliency appeared first on Radio World.

Radio World announced the recipients of the Best of 2021 Awards.

This award program normally is held in conjunction with the IBC Show, which was postponed and later cancelled this year.

The winners are:

• APTmpX – WorldCast Systems
• Adthos Platform – Adthos

These products will be featured in an upcoming issue.

The full list of recipients from TV Tech, TVBEurope and Radio World can be found here.

The pandemic disrupted the 2021 calendar for awards program in which Radio World participates. Just recently we also announced winners of the Best in Market Awards, a version of the program that normally runs in conjunction with the spring NAB Show.

The post Winners of Best of 2021 Awards Announced appeared first on Radio World.

Thursday afternoon commutes always tend to be particularly traffic-filled. On December 16, that was certainly no exception in Boca Raton, Fla. Thanks to the “snowbirds” and full-time residents, getting home from the office at 6pm took some time. Helping our Editor-in-Chief with the 30-minute commute home: Javier, a thirty-something Dominican who recently relocated to South Palm Beach County from New York City. Javier’s audio choice for his Lyft duties didn’t involve Spotify, or Pandora, or SiriusXM. It was a FM radio station. The timing couldn’t be better, given radio’s incredible delivery of millions of dollars in listener donations to charities galore during the 2021 holiday season.

Please Login to view this premium content. (Not a member? Join Today!)

(Flaticon/Freepic/AomAm)

Most of the people and companies that climb communications towers for a living in the U.S. don’t want a vaccine mandate. And their industry association is telling the government so.

NATE: The Communications Infrastructure Contractors Association said its member companies are worried about retaining their workforce if a federal COVID-19 vaccine mandate is implemented.

After President Biden and the Occupational Health & Safety Administration announced a mandate for private sector employees, NATE ran a survey of its members and now has sent a letter to OSHA expressing concern.

“According to NATE’s survey, nearly 80 percent of NATE members are opposed to a federal government mandate that workers be vaccinated,” the association wrote.

[See Our Business and Law Page]

“While NATE members generally oppose the vaccine mandate, many NATE members are encouraging and incentivizing employees to get vaccinated against COVID-19. Almost 20 percent of NATE members have either paid employees to get vaccinated or are considering similar incentives.”

It said the survey affirmed that its members are concerned a mandate would exacerbate workforce challenges they already face. Tower service companies already face a workforce shortage of almost 15,000 people, according to NATE.

“In fact, approximately 85 percent of NATE members believe that some staff would resign if they are required to be vaccinated against COVID-19, and 30 percent of respondents indicated they would lose more than half of their workers.”

The association said NATE members, like companies in other expert trades, “have struggled to recruit skilled workers.” It said the possibility of losing a significant number of technicians is a serious concern and comes at a time when America is investing billions of dollars in broadband projects.

“Furthermore, this could even impact the ability to deploy broadband and high-speed communications on federal lands and in federal buildings. Many NATE members, approximately 60 percent, either work on federal projects or have in the past, and if they are unable to hire and train workers to complete these federal contracts, then the government’s own broadband goals may be unfulfilled.”

NATE said tower labor is done primarily outdoors and at elevations that minimize risk of exposure and immediate interactions with other people.

“Americans needed tower technicians and communications workers to help lead us through the transition to remote learning and working, and tower technicians did not stop doing their jobs due to the fear of COVID.” The association urged OSHA “to strongly consider the workforce and economic ramifications that the ETS and any federal vaccine mandates could have on our industry as well as on every American.”

Comment on this or any article. Write to radioworld@futurenet.com.

The post Would Tower Climbers Quit in Droves Over Vaxx Mandate? appeared first on Radio World.